Quote:
Originally Posted by Abba-Dabba
Del Shofner was better.
Henry Ellard was better.
Harold Jackson was better.
Anquan Boldin was better.
Stanley Morgan was better.
Hines Ward was better.
Jimmy Smith was better.
All not in the HOF.
Somehow you guys have convinced yourselves DHop is the 2nd coming of Cris carter or something. Is he good? Without a doubt. Is he worth it at this point?
**** no.
|
Wtf? Didn't even address my post.
And who the hell is Shofner/Morgan/Jackson? As far as I can tell Shofner played in the 50s. Please.
Ellard? I mean, I liked Ellard, but seriously? Check your stats; he's not in the same ballpark. Never mind DHop has the huge advantage in hands.
Boldin? Again, liked him, but no. I mean, at least the stat lines are comparable, but just take 1st down receptions; both have 695, but Boldin played another 4 years to hit that number? DHop is already there. DHop is the better athlete, more versatile, better hands.
Hines? Really good player, close in some of the stats, sure hands and tough as nails, so pretty similar in several respects. Probably should be in the HOF, in my book. Not the same athlete though.
Smith? Decent comparison, except he doesn't have the production over the same period of time.
not to mention that some of those guys were strictly boundary guys, while DHop can play from anywhere.
But again, who cares about your idea of what an HOFer is supposed to be?
